The Irish standard., 1887-04-23

TIL
charges preferred in series of articles
which have recently been running in
the columns Of the London Times en-
titled "Parnellism and Crime" The
object of the articles was to prove that
Mr.. Parnell and his colleagues have
been associatiDg with certain men who
had been convicted of various charges,
and more particularly those who parti-
cjpated III the Phoenix Park murders.
Evidently the Times intended by this
means to ALLEVIATE the sympathy Of the
people on this continent as we'll as
those in the old country from the Irish
cause. Hitherto the Nationalist have
not paid any serious attention to the
utterances of the Times, approaching
the fact that of the London dailies the
"Thunderer.' or more appropriately the
''Slanderer, is the leastreputable, and
possesses no higher or worthier ambi-
ton than to act in consort with the
powers that be. The fraud was so
transparent that nobody deigned to dig.
Nifty the statements with notice. The
articles were principally1made up Of
garbled ex' racts from the Irish World
fearfully and frightfully distorted-but
even then did not present a case of cir
cumstantial evidence sufficiently strong
to justify the most vague suspicion that
the men accused were guilty of the less
serious charges preferred against them.
But the last was the most vituperative
and vindictive of the series. 1t con-
tanned what purported to be a fac
smile of letter alleged TO have been
written by Mr.. Parnell and addressed
to Mr.. Patrick Egan, Immediately after
the Phoenix Park murders. So that our
readers can Judge for themselves the
villalny of this attempt to damage the
Irish cause we reproduce it. By way of
explanation it might be stated that the
letter fills one side of an ordinary sheet
of note paper. and is in strange hand
writing. 'Yours very truly, Chas. S.
Parnell," is at the top Of the other leaf.
Dear Sir: am not surprised at your friends
anger, but he and you should know that to de-
nounce the murders was the only COURSE open to
us. To do that promptly was plainly the best
policy. But you can tell him and all others con-
cerned that. although I regret the accident of
Lord F. Cavendish's death, I cannot refuse to adj
nit that Burke got no more than his deserts
You are at liberty to show him this and others
whom you can trust also. But let not my address
be known. He can write to the House of Com
mons.''
1t is needless to remark that the let
ter is an Infamous concOction, and from
the alleged fac simile published in the
Times, it is said that the man who
forged it cannot be complimented on
his handiwork. Even it MIR. Farnell
held such views as stated, no one
would for moment suppose that he
was foolish enough to trust them to
letter which would in all probability be
opened by the Government officials.
But those who know Mr.. Parnell and
have watched his career cannot be led
to believe that he did not sincerely re-
greet the deplorable circumstances sur
rounding the murders Of Cavendish and
Burke. But apart from this, Mr.. Par
nell points out the difference between
the handwriting of the forged document
and his own. In an interview last Mon
day he stated that although at first
sight the formation Of some of the let
tiers in the Tines Fac-Simile" ap-
peared to resemble his autograph,
close comparison shows decided and
striking differences in many important
points. In the forgeries the handwrit-
ing is upward, and in genuine downward.
Parnell always places full point after
his initial name, which the forger omit
ted. The err in 'sParnell' and "C'' in
"Chas' are quite different from any,
thing he has ever written. The letters
och" in ''Chas'' are abnormally long,
and the "S'' and 'tP" are the only let
tiers in any way resembling his genuine
autographs. At the beginning of the "a"
in the forged ':Chas'' the pen was evil
IDENTIFY taken off the paper, whereas in
the genuine signature it is always writ
ten without a break. The forgery,
Mr.. Parnell AYERS, is the work Of per-
son accustomed to pen and writing a
flowing hand, wherea his own writing
is in cramped style.
To the above reasons can be added
many others to prove the fac-simile"
the work of a forger, at the instance of
base conspirators. To outsiders, at
first sight, it may appear that Mr.. Par
nell should prosecute the editor of the
Times for criminal libel, but on sober
second thought it would perhaps be as
we'll to treat this latest effort to blacken
his character with silent contempt. The
letter in itself affords sufficient evidence
of it's own vile origin. AS to the gen.
-